The Federal Bank will finance the rest of the euro area implied a three-digit million sum – and every day there is more money.

Maximum of 250 billion euros may distribute the euro rescue fund to countries in the euro-zone in order to help them escalating national debt. Thus the EU members registered on 9 Established in May 2010. Of which were previously granted only 17.5 billion euros for Ireland. But as it turned out, the German Bundesbank has recently implied in a given volume of grants that provide all European rescue efforts in the shade.

The controversial figure is hiding under the heading “claims within the euro system (net)” in the monthly reports of the Bundesbank. Thereafter, the liabilities that have accumulated the European Central Bank (ECB) and national central banks in the euro area compared to the Bundesbank, have risen by 2010 to 338 billion euros. But the demands of national central banks in euro countries amounted to 326 billion euros. 2006, ie before the outbreak of the financial and debt crisis were the following €-that demands a total of only 18 billion euros.

This unabated increase in the debt of the euro area to the federal bench “makes experts stunned,” said Ifo President Hans-Werner Sinn. “If countries whose banks the loans were given, become insolvent, be liable Germany.” Such liability but was not democratically elected – as by the Bundestag – still decided by the federal government.

Weber had no chance

The Federal Bank shares to be installed on request: “The external assets of the Bundesbank in the financial crisis has risen sharply. An essential role played growing demands within the euro system in the context of the individual payments system target second ”

Target 2 is a system initiated in 2007, designed to offset payment flows between the euro central banks. Today it is the permanent source of funding of other Euro-banks have become. Among them are those countries that are not nearly insolvent or their banks without cheap central bank money can not sufficiently finance. “The decisive factor for this increase was a crisis-induced shift in the cash flows and lending behavior of banks in the euro area,” said the Bundesbank.

The remaining 30 April reigning Bundesbank President Axel Weber, however, had no chance to stop the debt avalanche. Since Target 2 in the establishment was not intended as a financing instrument, now devoid of any limitation.

2003 —– F.S.A. — States rogues operating in Pictet’s London office. Ivan Pictet
states that documents were forgeries but were later proved to be genuine in
the British Courts. He had documents destroyed in their London office —
hoping to hide the crimes.

2007 .- – – The Securities and Exchange Surveillance issued a recommendation
that the Prime Minister and The Commissioner of the FSA to take disciplinary action against Pictet Asset Management – Japan Ltd.

2008 .– Dec. – Pictet Bank state – ” We have never chosen any funds linked to Madoff.

2012 — – June. — Published in Anglo INFO .Geneva.— USA Trust Fund Investors were sent false and fraudulent documents by Pictet Bank in order to collect large fees. ( Like MADOFF)
Even after the SEC in the USA uncovered the fraud Pictet continued to charge fees and drain whatever was left in these accounts. Estimated that $90,000,000 million lost in this Pictet Ponzi scheme.

2012 – – – July. — De – Spiegel. — states – Pictet Bank uses a letterbox company in
Panama and a tax loophole involving investments in London to gain
German millionaires as clients.

Ironically the Pictet & Cie.Bank partners are bigger criminals than the criminals who have accounts in the their bank.

The bank is now seeking to re-structure — to cut the partners liability – hoping to off load their decades of criminal responsibilty – and protect their personal ill gotten wealth.. The Germans are right — the bankers should go to prison if found guilty of financial crimes..

Conspiring to pervert the Course of Justice.
Perverting the Course of Justice.
Contempt of Court.

Pictet & Cie Bank –Partners –(1996—2014)—guilty

Peters &Peters – Partners.— (1999—2014)— guilty.

The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld crucial documents requested under a High Court order. The bank and it’s officials/lawyers deliberately withheld evidence from the Police, and one of it’s account managers Susan Broadhead gave a false witness statement to the Police.
Another one of it’s managers Nicholas Campiche ( Now Head of Pictet – Alternative Investments.) concocted a letter pretending to be a client and closed his account. The senior partner (Ivan Pictet.) sought to have numerous documents destroyed,along with those copies held in their London office’s of Pictet Asset Management. Initially stating that they were forgeries then their lawyers Peters & Peters – Monty Raphael Q.C.–and the barrister Charles Flint.Q.C. later had to admit in Court that the documents were genuine.

———“ Constituents of mine have lost £2 million through fraud. The fraudster used Pictet & Cie – – a French Bank – – and Pictet Asset Management to back the fraud being perpetrated.””

(1) It is a criminal offence for a bank to knowingly act for an undischarged criminal bankrupt in so far as it seeks to assist that criminal bankrupt in the fraudulent movement of monies. ( Money Laundering.)

(2) It is a criminal offence for a bank to lie to the police and the bankrupts trustee in bankruptcy in so far as any knowledge of, or dealings with the bank was refuted .

(3) A bank can be guilty of Contempt of Court if it fails to comply fully with the Courts order for discovery .

(4) The banks contempt is further compounded if it fails to address its error after it is specifically drawn to the to its solicitors attention. ( Monty Raphael Q.C.).

(5) It is a criminal offence under the Financial Services Act to seek to destroy evidence that might be relevant to an investigation .

(6) It is a criminal offence not to relinquish control of funds to the Trustee immediately the fact of the bankruptcy is drawn to the banks attention.

(7) It is a criminal offence to lie or otherwise obfuscate the lawful and proper enquiries of the F.S.A.

In the F.S.A. cover up , they concluded that there had been “ Rogue” elements in Pictet & Cie’s , London operations . They had been moved from their London Office so who was there left to prosecute. “ Unbelievable.”

(1) Bankers who behave irresponsibly should face professional consequences.
(2) If anyone is found to have behaved criminally they must be prosecuted.
(3) The F.S.A and the Serious Fraud Office should be following up every lead,
investigating every suspect transaction .
(4) We need to make it 100% clear –those who break the law should face
prosecution.
(5) That we make sure we root out any wrongdoing that may have happened, whoever
is involved, however high or well connected they may be.

Both Ivan Pictet and Monty Raphael.Q.C. conspired to withhold crucial documents requested by the High Court – the FSA — and the Police Fraud Squad.

Written Parliamentary Questions received by the table office ..

(1) To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to ensure that Swiss Banks such as Pictet & Cie do not evade criminal prosecution under EU law even when the illegal act is committed by a London based subsidiary.

(2)To ask the secretary of state what steps he is taking to protect the rights of UK citizens who seek redress following criminal activities by Swiss banks with subsidiary offices located in London.

Quote. ( America’s Top Lawyer .)
You can be the richest man in the world with the best lawyers that money can buy but you cannot win against a man who has got nothing left to lose and is telling the truth.

*** We note that there has been a sharp increase in Peters & Peters partners leaving to go to other practices. Moving does not alleviate them of any responsibility from any illegalities that may have occurred at Peters & Peters during their partnership tenure. From 1999 onwards.

The consensus of opinion is the Pictet & Cie should be prosecuted , and that their U.K. banking licence should be taken away.

Their Solicitors at Peters & Peters .London “ struck off and prosecuted..”

*** Started campaign — June 6th.2008.
5years —- approx 10 .5 million e-mails – – – but still no writs, injunctions or threats of litigation – – – WHY – – – because it is all true.

*** . The bigger they are — the harder they fall.!!!
In America —- they would have all been in prison for the last seven years.

Feb 2013,— Pictet & Cie Bank Partners remove their unlimited liability.
They realise that all their personal wealth is at risk , the people they have conned might want their money back.